O yeah ! The yahoo will remind them that their skin colour is closer to the Israelis, that the Jews of America will go for them from a sense of Jewish Jihad, that Jewish money will stop flowing to their coffers .... and these good Republican and Democrat people will sell the US to the Zionists for pieces of silver. I wonder if the Russians and Chinese know how to destroy us too.

I am so sick of this conflict. Netanyahu has no shame going in and pandering to AIPAC, Evangelical Republicans and the ever useful idiot, the ambitious Eric Cantor.

Mahmood Abbas is useless and has last far outlasted his shelf life. Hamas are lunatics and useful idiots for Iran. As is the case in the US, the religious right is screwing things up all over the place.

Part of the reason why there are so many comments on this issue may be because of zealous little soldiers like yourself reappearing time and time again to help revive it. Even your tone reveals that this issue is personal to you. Do not get me wrong, I really do not mind but jomiku did make a legitimate point; there are other issues out there, many much more touching and open to debate. Popularity of an issue should not drown out other, perhaps more pressing, issues.

PM Netanyhu did a fine job of putting the arrogant Mystery Man in his place by reminding our uncredentialed POTUS that it is he, PM Netanyahu that leads and protects the country of Israel and that the MM's abandonment of the US stated obligation to watch their back is still in effect. I believe the misread by our own inexperienced occupant of the Oval Office has again brought this country another dose of world class embarrassment.

Were the PM here in this country running for office this coming election, he would probably get elected on the basis he has a real spine and he earned it the hard way.

So much criticism about the Israeli "reluctance" to make concessions.
With whom?? - Hamas that has sent thousands of rockets into Israel civilian areas?
With Fatah that glorifies suicide bombers?
with Fatah that broadcasts virulant anti-semitic TV programmes, many of them childrens programmes?
Why is no mention ever made of the over 800000 Jews that had to flee Arab countries in 1948. They were forced out, unlike the Palestinians that were exorted to leave by their own?

The main Zionist claim is that they have a supreme right to some of Palestinian territory because they lived there thousands of years ago. Let’s examine the core and real nature of this claim.

Firstly, this claim is mistaken and selfish in its core concept because Zionists fail to recognize that history is a continuum and that there were other people living in majority in Palestine before the Jews and also after the Jews. Zionists simply cut history at a convenient point for them and claim ancestral ties to the land as of that convenient point.

Secondly, whatever the claim, it is beyond absurd to try to shape modern world based on thousands of years old maps. Imagine if the rest of the world would be reshaped by who was on the land thousands of years ago. It would cause horrific wars, countless refugees, and unimaginable human suffering, exactly what is happening in Palestine.

Thirdly and most disturbing, Zionist goal was to establish a Jewish state wherever possible. Palestine may have been a preference, but Palestine was not the only location that Zionists planned as their state in modern times. Another location was Argentina where Jews have been migrating for hundreds of years for the purpose of establishing a state. Also, locations in Europe were on the list and that’s why the Catholic Church was killing/expelling Jews since Roman times (read the history of the Holly Inquisition). Whatever the location, Zionist plan was to simply occupy the people living on the land even if that would mean imposing a regime worst than Nazi Germany’s from which they escaped. And Zionists would just use a different ideological coloring than the one used in Palestine in the attempt to rationalize the occupation.
In conclusion, the main claim on which the Zionist regime is built in Palestine is erroneous, selfish, and a lie. I am categorically against generalizing, and recognize that many Jews are against the crimes the Zionist regime is committing and that many Jews are leading the global resistance to it. They should be proud.

If ever reached, the current and any other artificial “peace agreement” will be illegitimate before it is ever signed because (1) all people living in Palestine regardless of religion, race, origin, etc. (hereinafter “All People of Palestine”) were never given a choice on how they want their land to be governed, and (2) all contracts signed under duress are null and void.
The biggest problem in Palestine is that the Zionist regime never offered a choice to All People of Palestine on how they want to govern their land because the Zionist regime cannot exist as a democratic entity. If there was ever any democratic process in Palestine, Zionists would have been outvoted and the Zionist regime would have never existed. That is why the Zionist regime is the occupier because it does not offer choice (i.e. democracy), but instead imposes its regime (i.e. occupies).

Under all countries’ laws, any contract is null and void if it is signed under duress. The current Palestine “peace agreement” process reminds me of The Godfather movie where the mafia boss (i.e. the Zionist regime) made a guy “an offer he could not refuse” by placing a gun (i.e. Zionist conventional and nuclear arsenal) to his head and making him sign the contract. Like the mafia boss’ offer, any “peace agreement” other than the choice for All People of Palestine is a crime, and the contract is legally null and void.

The bottom line is that All People of Palestine never wanted to divide their land into artificial two states the way the occupation and this “peace agreement” attempt to divide it. From the beginning of the Zionist regime to its unavoidable end, All People of Palestine and the region never wanted the Zionist regime and they do not want it even more after all the atrocities the Zionist regime committed. I just cannot believe how the Zionist regime can be so ignorant to think that this or any other “peace agreement” that does not allow people to choose how they want to be governed will last and ensure its people’s survival. The Zionist regime fails to realize that no matter if it succeeds in muscling this “peace agreement” by unspeakable historic coercion tens of millions of moral people around the world will oppose it until it is corrected, and until justice and free choice prevail. Also, ever increasing number of Jewish people are realizing that Zionism is becoming a destructive force for them and are leading the global resistance to it.

Why would Zionists want to discuss any peace agreement with the Palestinians when they have overwhelming military supremacy, seemingly ultimate power, and apparently bright future? Because the future is completely opposite and Zionists know it.
1. All military powers in history with no exception ultimately came crashing down. Someone stronger always comes, and it does not take a rocket scientist to see (just look around you) this coming and not ending well for the current military power in Palestine. Forward-seeing Jewish people under the Zionist regime already started packing up and leaving for Australia, South America, and the U.S. before this occurs.
2. It is obvious that the Zionist regime survives mainly because of its external allies who so far provided it with money, weapons, political support, access to markets, etc. After countless U.N. human rights violations, killing of its allies’ citizens (search on youtube for American “Rachel Corrie” video of Zionist bulldozer crushing her to death), forging of its allies’ passports in acts of murder, etc. its former allies are increasingly turning against the Zionist regime. Who would want to be remembered in history as an accomplice in international murders and especially of their own citizens.
3. Not only that the list of remaining supporters is growing thinner, but an international coalition is formed and growing larger of countries that are cutting all economic and diplomatic relations with the Zionist regime.
4. No country ever survived a complete isolation from its neighbors. No person of the area currently under Zionist occupation can obtain any type of visa from any of the surrounding countries for any reason – a complete land lock.
5. Well attended speeches take place almost weekly at colleges and universities across the U.S. and the world condemning the Zionist regime, their remaining supporters, and companies that do any business there. These speeches are often lead by moral Jewish people, church leaders, business people, etc., in addition to traditional peace activists.
6. The West where most of the traditional supporters of the Zionist regime are located is loosing global influence. China, the Middle East, South East Asia, Russia, South America, etc. are emerging as new pockets of economic and political power where the Zionist regime has angered most of the population.
7. Not only that the West is declining, but Zionists are loosing political control in the declining West. Diversity is bringing minority groups into politics, groups that are actively opposing the Zionist regime.
In conclusion, the Zionist regime is negotiating now because its future is changing for much worse. It knows that it temporarily exists now only through the force of its arms and this will be short-lived. It knows that it is at its peak and a downturn has come. It is a mistake to negotiate with the Zionist regime at the present time. But, if you have to negotiate, do not accept anything less than a single region in question (single state) where all who live there are equal. Any other “solution” would just reward the Zionist regime at the time of its demise. If the Zionist regime wants true piece, let’s not make it dependent on Zionist political and land acquisition goals, but on democratic vote for all who live there and making everyone equal (something we Americans cherish so passionately).

The neighbors of Israel are trying to destroy her. Anyone that does not see this is a fanatic (at best). So, I am not sure what peace we are talking about here. The only peace there is, is in the imagination some Western liberals. Again, that starts to sound like a religious messianic craze: "I will insist on it, no matter what the facts on the ground are" As someone who grew up in the Soviet Union, I am very familiar with religious fanaticism (communism) without the actual religion.

The Israel-Palestine conflict will always pop up in the news because it draws a lot of attention and debate. Also, a lot of people-including this paper-want a just peace, so today's speech by Bibi will explain Israel's position/intransigence to the stuttering peace process.

Moreover, The Economist will judge from the number of times people have opened the article, and the staggering amount of comments that people do want to be kept informed. You moaning about it on the Comments page will only justify to continue their level of coverage.

Criticism of Israel is welcome by Israeli and Jew alike. In a paper, such as this one, there would be little to no problem in joining a criticism of economic issues in Israel. In general interest papers, criticism of the general state of Israeli culture, economy, international diplomacy, national dialog, etc... these would be welcome. All such criticism is valid so long as it is premised on the basic right of Israel to defend itself and to defend the Jewish nature of Israel. Criticism of Israel is often couched in terms that deny Israel's Jewish nature, portraying the defense of Jewish interests as contrary to the world's interest and assumes that global opinion is a fair and valid arbiter of justice. Those who criticize Israel for defending against Arab assaults are anti-Semites. Those who argue against Israel's Jewish nature are anti-Semites. Those who waste their energy on picking out minor and meaningless quotes in order to extrapolate them out into a greater criticism of a party in power, these are just partisan hacks pushing easy buttons to get the rest of their partisan base excited. It is really not hard to figure people out by the generalities they favor

If one believe the author of this article one would think peace is as simple as giving Hamas a country to run. If only life were that simple. On another note, What does an anti-Israel piece every week have to do with the economy?

As I noted, the real issue is people and there are many questions about Palestinian statehood which are actually important. Today, the head of Hamas said they won't recognize Israel because that would "cancel the right of the next generation to liberate the land." He asked, "What will be the fate of the 5 million Palestinians in the diaspora?" This is also from Ha'aretz.

So ... it may be that Hamas is trying to stop Palestinian statehood to prevent giving up this point. Or they may be posturing for recognition of a Palestine without recognizing Israel as a means to keep the conflict in full bloom. I don't see the latter happening in the UN, but I may be wrong. Would countries vote for establishing a state when that wouldn't resolve a single thing?

As I noted, the real issue is people and there are many questions about Palestinian statehood which are actually important. Today, the head of Hamas said they won't recognize Israel because that would "cancel the right of the next generation to liberate the land." He asked, "What will be the fate of the 5 million Palestinians in the diaspora?" This is also from Ha'aretz.

So ... it may be that Hamas is trying to stop Palestinian statehood to prevent giving up this point. Or they may be posturing for recognition of a Palestine without recognizing Israel as a means to keep the conflict in full bloom. I don't see the latter happening in the UN, but I may be wrong. Would countries vote for establishing a state when that wouldn't resolve a single thing?

T.V., I should have cleared this up at the time, but I did not applaud the law firm for dropping the defence of DOMA. I observed that this is the rough and unsentimental face of what it looks like when society drops a particular prejudice: governing elites in various sectors become unwilling to publicy defend that prejudice. It's a political battle between power players, and a player can judge that they have won when they see this sort of thing happening. I don't have an opinion on whether the law firm violated legal ethics by dropping the case because I don't know enough about that field or this case. What I can see is how powerful a signal it was of the gradual and seemingly inevitable victory of advocates for marriage equality.

In the same fashion, I would agree that in this case the initial move to drop the degree for Kushner showed the power of the right-wing Likudnik lobby in American society. The fact that the CUNY board then reversed itself and has now awarded Kusnher his degree is a promising sign of the power of J Street and other pro-peace organisations in the American Jewish community, and their ability to get themselves heard through press organisations like the New York Times and, er, this one.